Walther’s new LGV Challenger breakbarrel spring air rifle: Part 3

Walther’s LGV Challenger is an exciting new sporting breakbarrel springer.

Summary
I’ll cut right to the chase — this Walther LGV Challenger is everything I hoped for. This is a classic air rifle, and we’re privileged to see its inception. We were there!

Open sights
Today, I tested the rifle’s accuracy from a rest at 10 meters using the open sights. This rifle is equipped with fiberoptic sights, and we all know that they’re not precision aiming devices; but if you light the target brightly and shoot from a relatively dark space, the dots won’t appear. You’ll see a crisp, square post and sharp rear notch that you can use to the extent of your shooting skill.

Start of the test
Each time I break open this rifle, I’m reminded of why it’s so special. The barrel feels like a bank vault — both on opening and again on closing. Cocking is relatively easy and every one of the four pellets I tested loaded easily, yet were tight in the breech. I even like the size and configuration of the stock that seems to be made for me.

JSB Exact RS
The first pellet I tested was the one that I thought might be the most accurate — the 13.4-grain JSB Exact RS dome. Remember, the rifle I’m testing is .22-caliber, so all the pellets will be heavier.

Since I was using open sights, I looked at the target after the first shot to make certain the pellet had struck the paper. It had, and in the bull, too. It was at 6 o’clock, on center with the 10-ring so I didn’t adjust the sights. As I continued to shoot, I could see pellets dropping just below the bull — and the hole didn’t appear to grow much from where I sat.

When I went downrange to change targets, I saw the first group — 10 JSB Exact RS pellets in 0.464 inches between centers. It’s a good group that told me the rifle could shoot, but the verticality told me I needed to do better on estimating the bottom of the bull with the tip of the front post.

Ten JSB Exact RS went into this 0.464-inch group at 10 meters.

The rifle hangs perfectly dead in the hands when shooting. What that means is that I wasn’t fighting it to find a good hold point or to control the balance. It just hung there, giving me confidence. My off hand was back under the forearm touching the triggerguard.

The trigger does have some creep in the second stage, and I would want to adjust as much of that out as I could; but for this test, I left it as it was. It was light and posed no difficulty to good shooting, as you’ll see.

Crosman Premier
Next up was the 14.3-grain Crosman Premier domed pellet. They went to almost the same place as the JSB pellets on the target, which is a good sign that the rifle isn’t picky about pellets. Of course, I could only see the shots that landed in the white below the bull; but when I went down to change targets, I saw they were all in the same place! I had a remarkable group that measures 0.285 inches between centers. Look how round it is! This is what you see when a rifle really likes a particular pellet.

Ten Crosman Premier pellets made a 0.285-inch group at 10 meters. This is a great group — even for just 10 meters.

RWS Hobbys
The third pellet I tried was the RWS Hobby wadcutter. At just 11.9 grains, it goes the fastest of the lead pellets and is often among the most accurate pellets — at least at close range. Ten shots went into 0.408 inches.

Ten RWS Hobbys made a 0.408-inch group at 10 meters. This group is rounded, which is a good sign.

RWS Superdomes
The last pellet I tried was the RWS Superdome, which weighs 14.5 grains. It made a 10-shot group that measures 0.378 inches between centers. The group is taller than it is wide; but this came at the end of the test, so I may have been tiring out. I know that each shot looked perfect to me when it went off, just as all shots in this test did.

Ten RWS Superdomes made a 0.378-inch group at 10 meters. This group is vertical, which shows the possibility of a sighting error.

Opinion so far
I gave you my opinion at the start of this report. I think the new LGV Challenger is a wonderful new spring-piston airgun. I certainly did not expect to see quality like this from a new air rifle. I thought those days were past, but it’s now clear that fine spring-piston airguns can still be made when the maker wants to.

This rifle reminds me a lot of my Beeman R8. The trigger could stand to be improved, but not much more needs to be done. I think you’re going to like the LGV if they all work as well as the one I’m testing.

Future plans
Next, I plan to test this rifle at 25 yards with a scope. I expect the great shooting to continue. Then, I have to find more things to test it with, so I can hold onto it until Umarex receives their first shipment of rifles to sell so they can give me a price for this one.

89 thoughts on “Walther’s new LGV Challenger breakbarrel spring air rifle: Part 3”

B.B.,
There must be some new scopes coming down the pipe to test on this newest Walther. How about crosman’s new zombie knockdown target? I’m trying to give you any excuse to add another part to this series. I know, take it out to fifty with the premiers. Give you a price for this one? If you’re planning to purchase it, good for you.
-h

After the disappointing tests with the promising Hatsans, with their new Quatro trigger that looks so good on paper, I’m glad this particular rifle came down the pike. Personally, I prefer wood stocks to synthetic ones, but this one looks to be better then most other makers offerings. And because this Walther is a tad weighty, I think I may prefer this configuration. I may also have to bite the bullet, and get my Canadian PAL, which will allow me to purchase a rifle over 500fps and 4.2 flbs. Sounds ridicules, but I didn’t wright the law. By the looks of the piston and spring mechanism, I can’t see Walther producing one strictly for the Canadian under 500fps airgun market. It would cost Walther more to develop a system then they would ever make back. The sales numbers are simply too small. I’m now looking forward to the scoped accuracy test. Although 25yds, would leave me quite satisfied, I’m with hankmcrae when he asks you to “take it out to fifty with the premiers”. After all, this is a special rifle. Lets see it stretch it’s legs a tad.
Caio Titus

This is one of the things I like about Weihrauch (and a few other manufacturers); they go to the effort of making special versions of their rifles that can be owned by Canadians who haven’t got a firearms license. Considering how small our market is I’m surprised they find it worthwhile. I do really wish that when the legislation determining at what muzzle velocity/energy level an airgun starts being regulated like a powderburner that we had at least adopted the German regulations rather than just pulling the 500fps and 4.2 ft.lbs. (seemingly) out of thin air.

As for the new LGV: I’m glad they made a good rifle rather than just putting their name on some nondescript rifle bought in from outside. Too bad it’s not as pretty as the old LGV though!

I agree with about the Weihrauch and other manufacturers but the energy thing…
We would get more .177 rifles and that would be nice and all but we would get little .22 and virtually no .25 and don’t even think about those nice custom big bore rifles or pistol.
And if we had the same energy limit on pistols it would forbid us from getting almost anything but BB guns!

Oh no, we could still get any type of air gun we wanted – we would just need a PAL to buy one (not that hard to get!) but the no license required guns would include all of the F-in-a-pentagram models so the German manufacturers could ship us the same guns they make for their own no firearms license market. If you’ve ever waited on a shipment of slightly detuned Weihrauchs for the Canadian market you’d understand the appeal of this! I’ve always assumed the fact that the German regulation specifies an energy level only a little higher than ours is the reason this is feasible.

Mind you, I find it funny that I can buy a .75 Brown Bess replica without a license but to buy an FWB 300S I need a PAL!

I requested a .177 LGV from Umarex, as well as this one. The guns are not in the U.S. yes, and this was just a sample from the SHOT Show that they sent me to test. So, when the guns come in, I will get a .177 to test.

You are just the BEST wife ever Edith.I was only joking about telling them that.I would hate to negotiate price AFTER publishing groups like that from a springer,with fiber optic open sights no less! 🙂

I know, I know. Seems minor. But these little things that are done right add up to me. The flip side is that I’m getting so selective about identifying what airgun that I’m lacking to fill a void that little things add up in the negative column too.

I read all three parts, and still do not understand the underlever that needs to be pressed before the barrel breaks. I am assuming it is a locking device that creates the “bank vault” feeling you describe. Is this one of the reasons for the accuracy we see from this rifle? And, if it is, why don’t we see more of these devices in other airguns?

Although you can still find barrel latches on a few models still being sold new today (the HW35 comes to mind) they have dwindled in popularity for several reasons.

Most shooters don’t like the extra step in the cocking/loading cycle. The primary reason they have been phased out is because we’ve learned that they’re unnecessary to insure that a barrel returns to the same place everytime. Once upon a time it was thought that a locking device was necessary to return the barrel in the lock up position to the same identical place.

Most shooters don’t like the extra step in the cocking/loading cycle. The primary reason they have been phased out is because we’ve learned that they’re unnecessary to insure that a barrel returns to the same place everytime. Once upon a time it was thought that a locking device was necessary to return the barrel in the lock up position to the same identical place.

So should we suggest someone rig up a rod running parallel to the barrel, with a thumb-lever under the muzzle weight?

That way, the hand gripping the muzzle to cock the unit can press the lever upward, the rod then pulls a fulcrum at the barrel pivot to unlock the barrel.

Ah! So people DO still know how to make great springers!
While it’s not exactly a cheap one it’s still great and I’m chocked by the little difference pellet selection makes, how great it is to see a rifle capable with all those pellets, I mean the worst group is less than a half inch!
In part one you said the cocking effort wasn’t hard for a 700fps .22 rifle but didn’t mention how much exactly (or maybe I missed it?)?

If they were to come out with a Canadian detuned version I think I might have to get one even if I said I wasn’t buying another big heavy springer.

Know what the lack of pellet-pickyness means to me? It means that a great gun can swallow just about anything you feed it. It’s good (accurate) because there’s nothing chintzy about it. It’s high quality from the get-go.

After all the moaning and complaints about crappy guns and guns that just can’t group and the crazy machinations Tom goes through to see if it’s the gun or him (and casting doubt on his ability to still shoot well), we see that a well-made gun with quality parts and attention to all the details that others ignore will deliver small groups. How refreshing!

You should keep the rifle not because it’s accuracy, smoothness, vault like mecanics or good looks but because it would make a great rifle to test out pellets.
Got a new pellet claiming magic like accuracy throw it at the LGV and see what comes out. Those green, no lead pellets… let’s give them the best of chances and shoot a few in the LGV.

If you’re serious this is a 12fpe sporter in .22 caliber. Comparing this new LGV sporter in .22 caliber to the even heavier and more sedate vintage LGV match rifle in .177 shooting lightweight match pellets is apples to oranges. I’d say 0.285-inch group at 10 meters is pretty darn good for this new LGV sporter in .22 caliber. Anxious to see what this sporter does at 25 yards.

Are you not aware that this IS NOT a 10-meter rifle, but a sporting rifle that carries the LGV name? In other words, you can’t compare this rifle to the 10-meter LGV any more than a Pontiac GTO can be compared to a Ferrari GTO.

First, Lothar Walther is a different company than Walther, no? (Dan Wesson is a different company than Smith & Wesson, and Dennis Quackenbush is not the guy who made guns over 100 years ago, at least I know that much for sure.)

Second a TEN SHOT 0.285-inch group at 10 meters, with iron sights (and not an aperture, either), even on a bench rest, is excellent for anyone except an active competitive shooter with young eyes. Hey, the pellets are .22 themselves, after all! Sheeeesh.

I shoot my FWB 300s, more accurate than an LGV, off a bench with the FWB aperture and a globe front sight with a plexi insert, at 10 meters in my basement. I get 10 shot groups anywhere between .23 and .35. I probably average about .27 – .32. I have 50 year old eyes. I shoot left-handed using my left eye, but I am right eye dominant. Sometimes I can put 60 shots, fired within one hour, inside the 9 ring. As long as I can keep them all in the black, I’m not too hard on myself.

Granted, a guy who’s an Olympian in his prime can put 60 shots into a .22 hole off-hand, but a) he’s world-class, b) he has young eyes, and c) he has an Olympic shooting jacket, gloves, a rest, d) his gun is a pcp he can cock with a flick of his finger, and e) he’s shooting .177 caliber!

This is an exciting rifle because it’s accurate, easy-cocking, AND it’s in the field target power range, no?

And again, the 10 meter LGV and 300s are in .177, not .22. Under the circumstances in which B.B. shot a 0.285, I’d be VERY lucky (lucky, not good) to shoot a 0.35 with that rifle, and if I did shoot a 0.35 with it, I’d never let anyone ever take the rifle or the target out of my hands!

Sorry for the rant, but when I saw that target on my screen, I almost had to change my pants.

I really hate being “that guy” but here I go again suggesting one pellet for long range shooting in the LGV.

If you have time, shoot a group with the JSB 18.1gr pellets. Yes, they’re heavy for this power.

Here’s my reasons. I had a 12fpe, .22 caliber HW35 that shot many pellets well at 10 meters but only shot the 18.1gr well at 25 yards. Yes, it’s a weihrauch barrel vs. lother walther barrel. Here’s my other reason. My .22 caliber AA S410 has a lother walther barrel and can be turned down to 12fpe. At 12fpe the .22 caliber AA S410 shoots the JSB 18.1gr a tad better than any other pellets (the JSB 15.8gr are second best).

I’m anxious to see what the crosman premiers do in that LGV since they didn’t shoot worth a darn in either of the above guns at 25 yards.

The LGV is a large springer. It will take a long scope. The length depends on the shooter, because the eye relief determines the rear positioning. But a 14-inch scope ought to fit for most people. After all the pull is long.

Wow, great shooting. Yes, let’s hear about the price. 🙂 And is that a synthetic stock? I’m curious about why the breakbarrel design on this one makes it more suitable for hunting than the TX200’s underlever. On both, you’re swinging a lever down, and if the barrel remains sticking upward for the TX200, how does that change anything?

Michael, I agree with most of your names about baldness, but Hunter S. Thompson? He was bald but I don’t know about his manliness with his habit of hunting pigs with Tommy guns and his drug addiction and any number of other things. Robert E. Lee was certainly manly but the antithesis of baldness.

For those who missed the amazing motorcyclist in Moscow, have a look at the car action.

Well, Hunter S. Thompson once talked ill of a Hell’s Angel in the presence of several other Hell’s Angels. And after his IBM Selectric, his favorite possession was his .44 Magnum in SS (yes, sadly the same one he used to blow half his head off). IMO Thompson and Henry Miller were two tough dudes, for writers, anyway.

And Robert E. Lee had a comb-over in every photo I’ve ever seen of him (hatless, of course).

Hey, how could I forget Winston Churchill, the guy who said to a then-undefeated Hitler, “Bring it on!”

Matt, on the break barrels being better for hunting. It is generally a bit faster to reload a break barrel than an underlever or side lever air rifle under field conditions. Little less motion involved ,and you can reload without taking your eyes off the target. Also ,left handed shooters( I’m right handed) often find some underlevers and most side levers difficult to use. Personally I use my D-48 .22 side lever the most, and just try to make my first shot count so I don’t have to rely on reloading fast. As for multipule targets ,there is always next time. It’s not like your in a fire fight.

It’s a decent rifle. But for what it is, I think it’s highly overpriced. The things are around $500 or more. For the same price or even less I could get a very nice AK 47 with some nice extras on it. I just don’t see the money put into this gun to justify the large price tag for an air rifle. A .177 break barrel firing around 1000 fps with fairly good accuracy that my much cheaper Ruger airhawk can achieve in the right hands….I just don’t see the money for this gun. Bring the price down to around $200 and I might give it another look.

I just don’t see this gun for the price. It would get lost in all the other breakbarrels I own that fire the same velocity with similar accuract in the right hands. I might see it a bit more with a wood stock but not with an injection molded plastic stock. That just screams “CHEAP” to me. If they are going to show me a plastic gun it needs to get my attention. This one just isn’t doing that for the price and caliber.

Well, if you own a TX200, a Diana 54.52,48 ,46 ect or maybe a HW R-8,9,10,55,ect, and you just are looking at velocity and wooden stocks, I can see your point. Those guns are all very good and can be as accurate as this one. I have some of those guns ,as well as some chicom clones that I have gunsmithed into reasonably accurate guns, but you don’t get what you didn’t pay for. The good ones cost money . BTW, this LGV also comes in two wood stocked versions. One a sporter type and the other an adjustable comb version.

It just isn’t speaking to me for the price. I’ll spend money on a gun if it gets my attention. My fully tricked out Airforce Condor is sufficient evidence to that. I poured quite a bit of money into it and put only the best of everything on it. It totally stands out from all the other guns in the racks and screams “Pick me up and shoot me all day long”.

But this gun would simply vanish in the gun racks in my collection. It doesn’t matter if it has a wood stock, cheap plastic stock or whatever. It just does not grab my attention by looks or performance when I have 100 more similar to it in looks performance and function. Now if it came in a .357 or something that could back up that caliber with power too I might be the first one on the phone with my credit card out. But it doesn’t so it isn’t making it into the armory.

I have quite a marksmanship pedigree. I’ve shot at some very exclusive events such as the Canadian Army Trophy. We won it that year too. So I understand the value of a decent gun, but looking at this thing I just think it’s very over priced for what it is. At this point in my life I am looking for something that doesn’t just get lost in the gun racks and gathers dust. I just don’t think this gun is calling to me for what it is. As I said if it was $200 instead i’d think it was a more reasonably priced gun and might give it a bit more serious look. But for $500 or better I’d pass it up as over priced.

Yeah. Lots of good guns have gotten lost there. I have quite a few i haven’t shot in years now just because there are so many. And with the addition of a collection of AK variants for this year even my condor is in danger of being overshadowed by these foreign intruders this year as I take on an all new groundhog and the next generation of muskrats. I’m setting up the AK47 with scope, laser, camera and bipod as well as foregrip. I already have every metal piece durocoated. The thing will never rust.

One thing I’d like to see is a 2240 pcp gun. It might have just 10 shots to it but it would be a great squirrel getter ridder of-er when someone is deer hunting. I’m busy putting one together right now as I find the time to work on it.

When you write that you could get an AK-47 for $500, less than the price of this Walther air rifle, what AK-47 are you referring to, a top-of-the-line airsoft AEG, because those are less than $500. The old Chinese Industry Brand side cocker pellet rifle that looked kinda AK-like, which was around $100? Or are you referring to the Junker BB rifles from Russia? Those go for way more than $500, probably over $1000, but they do not shoot well.

I can’t figure what model of AK-47 you’re arguing would be a better airgun for the price than this Walther Challenger.

Now, for 20%-25% more money than this Walther, you could get a TX200, which is perhaps of significantly more than 25% better than the Walther. Or there’s the HW97, which is also more money but also more airgun than the Walther.

But I’m unaware of any AK-47 air rifle in the $500 range, let alone one that is a better shooter than this air rifle.

At the same time I can save that money and pull out any other number of breakbarrels I already own and do the same thing i can do with this gun. Other than a more complicated mechanisim to lock the barrel in place when it’s closed, I just don’t see anything in it i don’t already own. It looks like many others already out there. The power plant is like 100 other guns I already own, the sights are similar, the rifling is similar, it even takes all the sights every other one has. I want somebody to show me an air gun that says… “Shoot me. I’m worth the time.” I believe crosman has a few I’m eagerly looking forward to since i like that tactical rifle look. I might never shoot them, but they will look great on the wall.

That’s some pretty good iron sights shooting! Of course, the gun delivers too. I give you a lot of credit because probably all of my air with fiber optic sights leave a lot to be desired. All of them have some amount of play, so I doubt that real precision can be achieved with them. Based on my experience, air-gun sights are for plinking, at best. The groups that you shot are probably close to the limit of precision that one can get with those sights.

Granted, you do pay a premium for the honour of owning a gun with the name Walther LGV. But, as B.B. has shown us, this LGV is as accurate as any. We still have to see what it will do at the longer hunting distances, but based on the 10m groups, I see no hick-ups to worry about. It’s what is inside this rifle, that makes it what I would call ‘revolutionary’. I think Air Arms, etc, and evan Weihrauch have stood up and taken notice. It’s hard to describe the special piston and air chambers used to smooth and dampen vibration and sound. Maybe B.B. will favour us with a couple of pictures of what makes it tick. I don’t see anything on the market with the technology this gun offers. I would buy one just as soon as I could.
Caio Titus

What you are really asking for is a 4-way comparison of those four rifles. That would be a highly subjective report, so I don’t think testing is the way to do it.

Also, the price spread is very large. Is it fair to compare an under-$300 Diana 34 with a $600 TX2 00? Probably not, but that doesn’t mean that I can’t do it. But I am comparing products with vastly different backgrounds.

Let me give this some thought. I’m not saying that I would write such a report, but I will think about how I can best do it, and if I see a way, I will give it a try.

The 4 way test would have several interesting results:
1. While the woodwork, fit/finish, and quality are obviously better on a rifle that costs double – how much difference is there in accuracy/ease of shooting accurately?
2. Is the LGV really a closer competitor of the R9, since they are both break barrels and that causes characteristics that are large in comparison to the barrel lock and special inner parts – or more closely a competitor to the TX200 that it is priced similarly to?
3. Once you get into the LGV/TX200 price range, how much more accuracy/ease of shooting is an under lever compared to a break barrel?

The cost of this thing seems to be the only flaw anyone can find (assuming the higher power is available here for those that want it). I think it is pretty nice and a welcome option in the r9 class. Someday, I’ll need my “ultimate” airgun and this one might be in the running.

As for price, made in Germany with solid metallurgy doesn’t come cheap. The Diana 34 is now almost $300, and probably worth it. The really nice “anniversary” model was about the same price as this one, I think.

Unless somebody can come up with a way to build nice springers in the US cheaply, we better get used to paying more. Even the Chinese airguns are going up, and they will go up more soon.

Michael,
I wasn’t referring to an airsoft gun. I was referring to a real 7.62×39 firing AK47 from the Romanian Armory, not airsoft which I would never have since I don’t take airsoft seriously. An actual AK47 at the time I bought mine they were under $400 but I have been reworking mine. All my additional stuff I have done to it have brought the price up on it if I ever decided to sell it and the price will continue to rise as I make it more and more high end. Plus this whole gun grab thing they have going on is only driving prices higher for them.

In that case I would suggest that for all of your skill and championships with guns and despite the hundreds that you own, you simply do not “get” airgunning. At all. I hear and read this all the time, people who think of the airgun as some sort of lesser substitute for powder-burning guns, people who think of an air rifle as something to purchase if one cannot afford a powder-burner. If I wrote a post like B.B.’s “I’m so frustrated!,” it would include this mindset.

An analogy for this might be, “Why would you spend $6000 on a bicycle when for that same amount of money you could buy a reliable used car? Or a fine used motorcycle?”

I own seven air rifles that each cost much more than most powder-burning AK-47s. If I wanted an AK-47, or twenty of them, I’d simply open my checkbook, like I did for these air rifles. I am into airguns, not all guns. There are many like me, just as there are many people who are gun enthusiasts AND airgun enthusiasts.

Take B.B., for example. He gets excited about his powder-burning Ballard rifle. Then he gets just as excited about the TX200 or a classic vintage airgun. B.B. doesn’t think of a Sheridan Supergrade as a “poor man’s” powder-burner. He thinks of it as a totally different animal, as do I.

But you seem to compare airguns one-on-one with powder-burners in the same price range. You do not deeply understand airgun collecting, despite your estimable marksmanship and ownership of countless airguns.

And even if we were to compare the AK-47 at $500 against a Walther Challenger at $500, as if they were the same thing, consider the following: a) the Challenger is quieter, b) the Challenger is less smelly, c) the Challenger is easier to clean and requires cleaning far less often, d) the Challenger can be shot in your backyard or basement, e) the Challenger can be shot safely with a simple wood backstop, f) the Challenger has no disadvantages to the AK when it comes to dispatching small vermin, and finally, g) the Challenger fires ammo that costs 1 1/2 to 5 cents per round.

Nevertheless, I maintain that comparing/contrasting an AK-47 to the Walther Challenger is like comparing/contrasting a golf club to a table lamp.

Actually I do get quite excited over airguns. But it does take seeing something special, new, or unusual to raise my excitement. But I am not a traditional collector. When the Gamo Whisper first came out with their sound supression system I was one of the first ones to get one. Same thing with their air shotgun. I had never seen one of those before. When I saw the Crosman M417 I was also enthused about it. I like the military detailing despite the fact the gun is plastic from butt stock to flash suppressor. And I have quite a fondness for my Airforce Condor. I’ve even gone so far as to get hold of a tech force 66 and tech force 67 ince the takedown bullpup design was so novel. But this gun… I’m just not seeing it. It would get lost in the lot along with the Ruger Airhawk, Savage Arms enforcer, The Gamo Big cat, and many others like it. So for what they are asking for this gun, it simply gets a thumbs down and doesn’t make it into my collection. It simply does not stand out enough from the stock that is pretty much like all others to the same spring piston, to the same break barrel action that needs the same cocking force.

Basically I try to collect the more innovative guns and this gun I personally don’t feel is all that innovative. So instead of using my money on this particular gun, I’m putting that monet into something I am excited about. At this time it is my AK47’s. Who knows? Soon one of the air rifles I know is coming out that I’ll be excited about and my wallet will open. This gun just isn’t it. Personal taste and all. Not everybody wants to spend the big bucks for a label or brand name.

What you’ve written above sounds perfectly reasonable, and I admit I completely overreacted. It could be that I have become so passionate about collecting, learning about, and shooting airguns of different eras and varieties that I’ve become defensive when someone makes what I consider to be a false comparison, that airguns and “real” guns do the same thing, are owned for the same reasons, etc. Inevitably they come to the conclusion that because effective handguns can be purchased used in excellent condition for less than most of the airguns on Pyramyd Air’s site, that something is “bass-ackwards” when it comes to airguns.

What some people miss is that no one buys a Gamo or Diana or Weihrauch or Air Arms gun for the same reason that someone buys a Browning 12ga, Henry repeater, Glock handgun, or .38 Special. Those are all perfectly capable of self-defense, and a couple of them are perfectly capable for certain types of hunting.

I can walk into my local Gander Mountain and see a Gamo air rifle for $350, a Beeman air rifle for $500, an old Mauser for $350, a Ruger handgun for $500, a used pump shotgun for $400, and a bolt-action ranch rifle for $400. Neither the Gamo nor Beeman is suitable for hunting anything larger than a rabbit, unless you have a high-percentage heart/lung shot lined up at VERY close range and a medium-sized racoon that’s knocked over your garbage can for the last time. Most people can’t figure out how a well-made, good shooting airgun is a fine piece of machinery on its own, with no comparison to a firearm being necessary or even appropriate.

So it was the AK-47 instead of the Charger for my $500 reasoning that pulled me in. If you had instead written that the $500 would be better spent paying for another class for your son or daughter at the local community college, or for a new set of tires for your truck, or anything not rifle related, I would not have misinterpreted you.

No problem. Some people do collect these guns and use them. Understandable. I collect guns that are innovative for their time. But I seldom collect older guns for the simple fact that I do not know what might be wrong inside or where that gun might have been ect. Plus repairing a gun the older it gets grows harder and harder until you basically have to invent new parts for it. I don’t do that so I avoid the older used guns. Most of my guns are what I call “working guns”. Not meaning they are operational vs. inoperable. I mean they are out in the field dealing with pests. So I have some fairly strict requirements as well for guns. For example the Bronco is a decent gun at a decent price but it has no place in my collection since it is a target gun only. I target shoot when there’s no game around and I get bored. But that same gun has to be ready to take a money shot too if something should pop up. If it’s too far away for the air rifle to take the shot, I reach out and get it with one of my powder burners. This year it’s going to be my custom AK47. So instead of spending the big bucks on this LGV which as I said would hide in the gun racks I have to spend the money getting my bigger meaner gun ready. This gun while new, and obviously a good field target gun, just won’t have a place in a stable of “working guns” that for my purposes are every bit it’s equal in my hands but seeming to be less complicated as far as cocking which just might mean the difference in getting off a shot or fiddling around with that barrel release lever and missing the moment.

But show me the new crosman that looks like a AR15 or the one that looks like a SCAR, and I’ll be all over them simply because I do collect the assault rifle looking guns and have been since the AIR17 back in the 80’s. Those are the guns I’m waiting for.

But almost anyone can shoot the LGV in their backyard/basement/garage… no so with the AK and how much can you shoot that AK before getting a bruised shoulder and how much will it cost you in ammo?
You can shoot this rifle all day long for a few dollars worth of pellets without getting up from your back porch.

Yeah. I get that too. and I do use my airguns that way as well. I’ll spend a day outside target shooting if I got nothing to hunt. As far as my AK bruising my shoulder, it won’t do much damage. They don’t have much kick at all. The gun absorbs all but around 2 pounds of that recoil. You could fire this thing from a kneecap or groin and not hurt yourself. As far as price, yeah it does get a bit costly if I used it for target practice. But I watch my shots. I only fire it when i need to which means I have to shoot a pest and it is in my sights. I carry 2 guns with me. One is my AK47 or my Mossberg 100ATR, which kicks like an angry mule, and the other is an air rifle. The air rifle always gets shot more than the powder burner.

The air gun is where the issue is. There are so many to choose from and I am no longer up to bringing a large selection with me that I have to pick one. The ones that all generally look the same even though they are fine guns and all have great power and are accurate mostly get overlooked for something that stands out in the racks and that gun that stands out will likely be on my shoulder too. That is why I say this LGV would not do it for me. It would be one of those great guns that never gets used since it would hide in the racks along with every other gun that looks similar. I’d see it and know it by name but just wouldn’t pick it up. Instead i’d be picking up something like my condor or perhaps the recluse or maybe even my hatsan 125th which I haven’t test fired yet. (even that heavy beast might find limited use.)

I don’t know where this rifle fits. It is fine for the UK 12 fpe market but quite a bit heavy for hunting though. In a market where power restrictions do not exist it is not ideal for hunting and too expensive for plinking. I would like to see the higher power .177 perform and if it does well, would wonder how it would shoot with a .22 barrel swap.

I’ll tell you where I think this new LGV will fit for me. Right next to my backdoor in my house in the city.

I don’t have power restrictions but do have a local ordinance that the pellet can’t leave my yard and also have a squirrel problem. Overpenetration is often a problem for me even with lower powered .177 calibers. This 12fpe .22 caliber springer that acts like it’s tuned out of the box may be the solution for those 25-35 yard shots.

So a common issue with this rifle is that it’s priced too close to some really nice guns, like the TX-200 III.
Related to this, in terms of what some of us really wanted and were hoping for, is the Crosman MAV 77, which apparently isn’t going to happen.

I’m hoping your attempt to adjust the trigger to something better than its factory setting is successful, as I find this one interesting, but I have become spoiled when it comes to triggers. With a rifle, anyway, I’ve become a snob for the refined two-stage trigger pull of a fine European wine, er, air rifle.

And your mysterious comments about the special internals of this one have me hooked as well!